• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How powerful is the switch?

R

Rifter

Lifer
I have watched some gamplay vids and it seemed underwhelming graphics wise. But its selling for $450 here in canada on black friday sales while the PS4 and Xbox are both below $300.

Did i just watch some poorly done graphically games and this thing has more balls and can compete with PS/XB or is it just overpriced Vs sony/MS systems?
 
More powerful than PS3, much less powerful than PS4. Buying a console in its first year seems like a sucker buy IMO, unless you're just dying to play BOTW and/or Super Mario Odyssey. Though I'd probably swallow the $300 US price and buy one this year if they'd release the freaking Virtual Console already so I could play SNES games on a portable (no way I'm paying $200 US for the New 3DS just for SNES games).
 
thanks for the link shorty. The hardware in this thing is seriously under powered for the price. I guess there is a reason i only buy nintendo handhelds nowadays not the home versions.
 
Rifter said:
thanks for the link shorty. The hardware in this thing is seriously under powered for the price. I guess there is a reason i only buy nintendo handhelds nowadays not the home versions.
Click to expand...
If you look at the estimated BoM, it's not actually all that cheap. You pay a lot for mobility, to the point that Nintendo is likely only turning a small profit with current NAND and RAM prices.

But regardless, it's a handheld Nintendo console that can be connected to a TV with a proportional level of power. It is not (and can not) go toe-to-toe with current-generation large home consoles in performance.
 
Count me among those who think it's underpowered for the price. I hopped on board anyway with a preorder, because I always buy Nintendo handhelds (even though they market it as a console that happens to be portable, I almost always play it handheld), because they always have a good library of games. I don't regret the purchase, though I hate the price gouging for peripherals and the lack of power in the base unit. It's still far, far ahead of the 3DS, at least.
 
JujuFish said:
Count me among those who think it's underpowered for the price. I hopped on board anyway with a preorder, because I always buy Nintendo handhelds (even though they market it as a console that happens to be portable, I almost always play it handheld), because they always have a good library of games. I don't regret the purchase, though I hate the price gouging for peripherals and the lack of power in the base unit. It's still far, far ahead of the 3DS, at least.
Click to expand...

Well, keep in mind the Xbox and Playstation sell at a LOSS.
Nintendo has never sold their consoles below cost, except for perhaps stupid crap like the Virtual Boy.

Sony and Microsoft are betting you'll spend enough on games and overpriced DLC that they'll recoup losses and eventually make a profit. I think as far as games are concerned, Nintendo actually gives you a lot more for your money.
 
JujuFish said:
Neither Sony nor Microsoft have sold a console at a loss in a very long time. 2009, maybe?
Click to expand...

The PS4 was sold at a slight loss but was profitable in a few short months. The costs were much less than previous consoles. XB1 probably similar due to similar (or same) hardware
 
Look at ViRGE's link. The PS4 had a BoM of $381 with a $399 MSRP. The XBO had a BoM of $471/$347, below the $499 MSRP.
 
JujuFish said:
Look at ViRGE's link. The PS4 had a BoM of $381 with a $399 MSRP. The XBO had a BoM of $471/$347, below the $499 MSRP.
Click to expand...

I specifically remember that Sony had to announce they were making a profit. You can't just take the sale pricing and say "they're making money". AMD makes more money per console sold than Sony does as well. So while it wasn't sold for less than the build cost, it was not immediately making profits for the company.

https://www.engadget.com/2014/05/23/sony-hirai-ps4-profit/
https://www.polygon.com/2014/5/23/5744344/ps4-already-profitable-for-sony-ceo-says
 
purbeast0 said:
$360 for a Switch + Mario Odyssey is more than worth it.
Click to expand...

One thing I just don't understand: why is the virtual console not out on Switch almost nine months after launch? I typically don't buy consoles until they have been out a couple of years because (1) the game catalogs are too small until then and (2) I don't want to pay launch price on the hardware. But I would make an exception for the Switch if they had a working VC since I love SNES games and I think they would be incredible on a portable, especially the Switch considering the size of that screen. I don't get why they don't at least have an NES and SNES emulator up and running for it. My brother seems to think it's because it would compete with the SNES Classic, but why would Nintendo rather I buy an $80 machine that they'll never get another cent off of vs buying their flagship which I would be buying games for for years to come? The VC is what could really make the Switch appealing to me. I don't like modern 3D games on handheld but I have always found 2D games to be great on portable devices.
 
SteveGrabowski said:
One thing I just don't understand: why is the virtual console not out on Switch almost nine months after launch? I typically don't buy consoles until they have been out a couple of years because (1) the game catalogs are too small until then and (2) I don't want to pay launch price on the hardware. But I would make an exception for the Switch if they had a working VC since I love SNES games and I think they would be incredible on a portable, especially the Switch considering the size of that screen. I don't get why they don't at least have an NES and SNES emulator up and running for it. My brother seems to think it's because it would compete with the SNES Classic, but why would Nintendo rather I buy an $80 machine that they'll never get another cent off of vs buying their flagship which I would be buying games for for years to come? The VC is what could really make the Switch appealing to me. I don't like modern 3D games on handheld but I have always found 2D games to be great on portable devices.
Click to expand...

I have no answer. Maybe they feel it would hurt DS sales or something but I doubt it because I still feel that while there is some crossover, maybe more so than ever, they are different markets just based on the price point alone.
 
Rifter said:
I have watched some gamplay vids and it seemed underwhelming graphics wise. But its selling for $450 here in canada on black friday sales while the PS4 and Xbox are both below $300.

Did i just watch some poorly done graphically games and this thing has more balls and can compete with PS/XB or is it just overpriced Vs sony/MS systems?
Click to expand...

The Switch wasn't made to compete hardware-wise. Nintendo hasn't done that since... the GameCube probably. They've almost always been about games (if not always), and gameplay quality (polish, optimization, attention to details, etc), especially for their first party games. And appreciation of graphics is always subjective. Some would say that BotW on the Switch still looks bad and that the art style was done as such due to hardware limitations (of the Wii U, mind you; since BotW was designed for the Wii U initially), when others find it absolutely charming and wouldn't have chosen anything else even with the hardware of the XBOX One or the PS4. I don't think that Mario Odyssey is a "system pusher" yet, but it's a better representation of what the Switch can do visually over BotW since Odyssey wasn't originally made for the Wii U and then ported to the Switch; but was made for the Switch from the start. Anyway, for now it does look like Nintendo "got it right" with the Switch. It's a successful handheld system (it's a portable system that you can plug on a TV, not a home console that you can bring outside) that will last them a good 4 or 5 years if they keep coming up with good quality games like BotW and Mario Odyssey every year without going dry once.

Additionally, I do think that Nintendo will eventually come up with some "Pro" or "Enhanced" version of the Switch in maybe two years or so from now, and some games will be optimized for that version in mind. It's not guaranteed of course but I do think they'll do it to ensure that there's a minimum amount of respected 'industry standard' going forward in time while not being "forced" to release a full new system again in just three years (however, even a would-be "Pro" Switch wouldn't compete hardware-wise against anything Sony or Microsoft will have). Ultimately, considering that - in my opinion and generally-speaking - when you "go with Nintendo" you always have bang for your bucks in the end (although patience with Nintendo is always required) I'd say that now that it has BotW and Odyssey out (and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe for those who care) it's worth it to buy it even if its price seems high versus how the graphics seem "bad" perhaps. It's not a powerful system, but it's a system that's powerful-enough for Nintendo's goals (just bring good games, period; you don't need a super console for that, you need good ideas and a good dev team; and a lot of time). If I had to go with a console right now I'd only go with the Switch.

With all this said though, if what you want mostly are 'good graphics' then yeah, I guess just avoid the Switch.
 
Hardware wise I'd say the PS3 is probably faster in terms of CPU performance, but not as fast when it comes to GPU performance.

Not that I own a switch, but I do understand where Nintendo is going with it. Some of the most fun I've had gaming was with my Nintendo DS, which is anemic by today's standards.
 
I don't care how powerful it isn't, I care about the games. I currently have the zelda game, the mario Odyssey game and skyrim and they all play great. That's the bottom line, they are fun! Especially skyrim. I have all iterations of skyrim and have over 600 hours on the PC version and I am still having a blast playing it on the Switch.
 
Ancalagon44 said:
Hardware wise I'd say the PS3 is probably faster in terms of CPU performance, but not as fast when it comes to GPU performance.

Not that I own a switch, but I do understand where Nintendo is going with it. Some of the most fun I've had gaming was with my Nintendo DS, which is anemic by today's standards.
Click to expand...

I love my DS to, i own 3 of them in various formats, bought 2 used. But I also paid less for all 3 combined than the switch is going for right now.

Perhaps ill pick one up in a few years when the game catalog gets built up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top